Jun 2, 2012 7:07pm
Re: should Romney court Deadheads like Obama did?
No need to apologize, at the very least your response and opinion were reasonably intelligent and original in thought.
I've stated this before, "you don't change Washington, Washington changes you." It's not easy for a President to persuade the Congress, Senate and Supreme Court unless you have political party alignment. And yes, Obama certainly has his faults, but let’s remember, he was handed an absolute pile of shit from his predecessor in 2008.
His vision and leadership skills were evident when called to the White House in September 2008 before the election in an intense meeting with Congressional leaders and Hank Paulson over the financial crisis where the key player’s came to an agreement on the outlines of the bailout package. As I recall, Bush walked out on this meeting.
Obama is not taking away our military, the main function of the militaries is to protect and defend the United States, not to conquer and destroy. The reduction on the war fronts and foreign policy healing work is quite an accomplishment after all the global damage created by the previous administration.
Obama has proven to be the most intelligent President of my lifetime and he's had three and a half solid years of experience and a track record of positive accomplishments and until a more intelligent and qualified man or woman arrives, he’s still the smartest man in the room.
The operative heading line in my post clearly stated a "Morality Play". Romney has publicly stated on numerous occasions his stance and position on these important civil right issues ironically spoken from someone who preaches less government, but then again Romney is known to say anything to get votes.
As of 2013, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be an 80-year-old cancer survivor. Stephen Breyer will be 74. Anthony Kennedy will be 76. Replacing even one of these judges with an Alito-style reactionary would have a huge impact on the development of American law that only start with the explicit or implicit overruling of Roe v. Wade, and a Romney who served two terms would probably be able to replace all three.
Even one term of Romney would probably result in a Supreme Court in which Antonin Scalia (at least until he's replaced with a much younger and even more conservative justice) would have to turn to his right to see the median vote.
Trying to downplay the possibility of Romney fixing an ultra-right-wing majority on the Supreme Court for decades, some pundits will inevitably talk not only about Romney's mythical secret moderation, but also about the unpredictability of Supreme Court justices.
Expect, in particular, to hear a lot about how Republicans appointed David Souter and Earl Warren and William Brennan. But these examples are irrelevant to how a contemporary Republican would choose justices. The fact is, judges selected for ideological reasons are extremely predictable.
Have you ever had the displeasure of sitting down with a Mormon and a Jehovah and asking them to explain why their belief systems are the right one? The bottom line in all of this is Romney's first loyalty is to his religious beliefs, country would be secondary in his attempt to conform country to religious convictions.
When you tell the 1% that they’re going to pay more taxes, expect an organized revolution from high places of wealth and power.
Have a nice day!